Malala’s Questions

By Bilal Zafar, January 3, 2010

Kabhi kabhi to humaray zayhen main aisay khayal aata hay keh agar Zardari ki baytee Swat main parhti to shaid school bundMalala Yousafzai during the taping of Capital Talk, Geo News, (August 19, 2009) hee nahein hotay”. With these words, Malala Yousafzai, sixth grader from Swat, brought the house down during the August 19th airing of Capital Talk on Geo News. As the host tried to deflect little Malala’s perfectly pitched zinger, probably aimed at Mrs. Shahnaz Wazir Ali, PM Gilani’s special advisor on Social Issues, who was sitting nearby, Malala tightly closed her lips to contain her beautiful smile. She had just hit a homerun. She knew it. And, she was loving every moment of it.

It was a homerun less because of what was said, but more because of who said it. It was the same Malala, daughter of a very brave father, who had stood in front of national press, right in the middle of a boatload of Taliban fighters in Swat, and asked the Taliban why girls like her were not allowed to attend schools. Her father had covertly continued classes for 5th and 6th grade girls in his school even after Taliban in Swat had decreed that girls not be educated beyond 4th grade. Now, she had turned the tables and asked why the powers-that-be had allowed the situation to become so bad?

Malala’s zinger poses some deeply troubling questions about not just the sorry state of our education system, but also about who we really are as a nation. These are difficult, perhaps intractable, political questions which are outside the scope of this blog. What is within our scope, however, is “eliticization” of our education system, which is quite obvious to anyone who cares to look.

Pakistan is a country of great contrast. From the great plains of southern Punjab to the sky-high peaks of the Himalayas, the country is home to stark contrasts of geography, culture and economy. What does not get talked about enough, however, are the contrasts in our education system. In this Information Age education is the great equalizer. Or so it is said. But, how can education be an equalizer when just a few miles from where Capital Talk was being taped, the International School of Islamabad (ISoI) charges annual fee of more than $16,000? I do not know how much Malala’s father earns in a year, but if he makes what an average Pakistani does in a year, which is under $900, then he would have to save 100% of his income for 18 years before he can afford to pay for just one year of Malala’s 6th grade education at the International School. In all likelihood, the fee at ISoI would have gone up by then!

This problem of exorbitant fees and the resulting elitism in the educational landscape is not limited to the likes of International School or to primary and secondary education only. In higher education, consider the example of Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS). LUMS has been the leading business school in at least the northern half of the country for over two decades now, and has developed a reputation of being an “elite’s” school. The label is not wholly without merit. After all, this is a school where the annual tuition (for the recently opened School of Sciences and Engineering) is over Rs. 400,000 – almost 6x the average annual income of a Pakistani. Just as a comparison, even the most expensive universities in the US have tuition rates that are in the same range as the country’s average annual household income, i.e., $40,000 to $50,000 per year.

It is true that schools like LUMS’ SSE offer generous financial aid and need-blind admission. And, perhaps, it is also true that the kinds of finances needed to run a state-of-the-art facility in Pakistan requires these tuition levels. In short, it may well be true that the kind of education that these schools want to impart requires the kinds of tuition that they demand. But, what is equally true is that when these schools decide to operate far beyond the reaches of ordinary citizens of this country, then they also bear an awesome social responsibility. It is not enough to provide limited number of scholarships to students that make it in the door, simply because millions of students can never get the kind of primary and secondary education needed to get their foot in the door. It is no accident, after all, that three quarters of SSE’s first batch of students came from schools that follow the Cambridge system, not the local FSc system. To me, scholarships and/or financial aid is what I would expect from any institution of higher education, regardless of the social context in which it operates. In Pakistan, educational institutions MUST do more.

The responsibility for “doing more” falls heavily on institutes of higher education for two main reasons: first, by virtue of their position atop the education pyramid, these institutes dictate what good and well-rounded basic education means, so their actions, and their example, can lead to a realignment of priorities throughout the basic and secondary education system. Consider for a moment, how, say, the Beaconhouse School System would have to re-design its secondary education programs if the top-tier universities in Pakistan announced tomorrow that they would be looking at “an applicant’s demonstrated ability and interest in community service”. I think it’s safe to say that it would bring about a paradigm shift, perhaps not instantaneously but certainly in the longer run. Second, these institutes rightly claim to be the breeding grounds of tomorrow’s leaders. In fact, that’s their core selling point. Another way to say this is that, these institutions are the last pit-stop before the top-crop of the society is sent off to the races – for power, influence, wealth and recognition. The years that these students spend at the universities have a profound effect on the choices that they make once they enter their professional lives. What could be a better way to influence their priorities than by exposing them to the ugly realities and shameful inequities of life around them?

Schools like LUMS, Agha Khan University, Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute and other elite private universities, therefore, have the twin responsibility of inculcating a strong sense of social responsibility among their students, staff and faculty, and uplifting the educational standards in the world outside their boundary walls. Both of these ought to be among the core components of their mission, and not just footnotes to it. While each university can come up with its own creative ways to fulfilling these responsibilities, following is a first attempt at some concrete proposals to make this happen:

  • Each of these universities should establish an Office of Community Service whose aim should be to conceive, facilitate and execute university-wide community service programs. This is important because, while student organizations can do a lot on their own, an office like this provides continuity, basic organizational infra-structure and, most importantly, institutional memory to effectively and perpetually execute good programs. This doesn’t have to be a large bureaucracy; it can be something as simple as a single mid-level staffer who coordinates work of various student bodies and brings faculty into the loop by offering them small, and focused tasks.
  • Service-learning should be made an integral part of the curriculum, and a program requirement for 4-year undergraduate programs. Summer internships following the freshman year can be used for this purpose. Students can, for example, be offered to tutor at low-cost tuition centers for metric and FSc students, or intern at NGOs, or organize and execute fund raising activities for university’s community service programs and other non-profit organizations.
  • Universities can also “adopt” low-cost private schools and assist them in improving their standard of education. Training teachers, hosting co-curricular activities on university premise, and organizing field trips for students can all be part of this “adoption” package.
  • Finally, society has given universities a unique power: the power to bestow honor upon people, primarily by granting individuals prestigious degrees for their academic achievements. But universities can also leverage this power to honor and highlight individuals who do the greater good. Unfortunately, NGOs and those who work for them often do not get the respect that they deserve. Universities can lead the way in transforming these social attitudes by bestowing honors and recognition upon these individuals. By doing so, they would be pointing a way to respect and recognition in the society that is different from the usual route through the corridors of power and wealth. A simple way to do this could be to invite people who work for the greater good to give commencement addresses and keynote speeches. Surely, they are better role models for our youth than the default option – the rich and famous.

Of all the things that watan-e-aziz needs, it needs nothing more than good men and women who see the world through the eyes of the common man, have the tools to make it a little better for everyone, and are cognizant of their responsibility of doing so. And, it is at our elite universities that all these ingredients can best be combined so that we can begin to answer Malala’s questions. And, if we don’t, Malala might ask: why can’t she go to the same school as President Zardari’s daughter after all? The lottery of womb? Something tells me it won’t be a compelling answer for this smart young lady.

7 Responses to “Malala’s Questions”

  1. Hassaan Sohail says:

    Great Article! if it can be made clear to the private institutions and businesses of Pakistan that contributing to social welfare directly correlates to increased innovation and barriers against a national brain drain, than an organic system can develop which not only has positive social implications, but directly contributes to the domestic economy. I may not be well informed about higher education systems in Pakistan, but I feel that unless a business argument can also be put forward, there is a high likelihood that stagnant programs will come about, which can be good in themselves, but would not address the underlaying problem of equality which you have pointed out.

    • Bilal Zafar says:

      Hassaan,

      Certainly, if a business argument can be made for what the ‘right thing to do’ is, that’ll be great. What that business argument might be for UNIVERSITIES, I have no idea. But, I think if universities can align their admissions criteria toward addressing the problem of “elitism”, then the rest of the system will have a business incentive to change its orientation (hopefully). I don’t think the alternative, i.e., some form of Affirmative Action, has much hope in all of this.

      But, I’m very interested in hearing from our readers what other measures can be taken by universities so that we can begin to address this problem.

  2. Joe Ryan says:

    Commenting specifically on “exorbitant fees and the resulting elitism in the educational landscape”:

    The actual experience around the world is that diversification of funding sources to include substantial tuition and other donations increases both the total number of seats available nationally and the access of low income students to elite institutions.

    Systems that depend more predominantly on government budget subsidies offer fewer seats in total and have less outreach by the elite institutions.

    If elite universitites are to provide the services suggested in the article (community service and so forth), they need more tuition income, not less.

    LUMS, to take that example, is substantially under-priced compared to similar institutions like the American University in Cairo and compared to the earnings potential of students. Higher tuition would allow it to expand its National Outreach Program, which enrols low-income students tuition-free.

    At the same time, the national system should also be diversified institutionally. Requiring each every insitution to be the same as all the others prevents the system from providing all it can. There is room for LUMS and there is room for community colleges as well.

    • KZ says:

      Joe,

      Would you like to provide more details to explain your contention,

      “If elite universities are to provide the services suggested in the article (community service and so forth), they need more tuition income, not less”

      Of course there are ways for an institution to be civic minded that might cost money but this is by no means a compulsion. There are many other ways for institutions to be civic minded and encouraging their student body to be civic minded that doesn’t cost institutions anything.

      As an example, there is a small organization at Stanford called Night Out-Reach. It’s members roam around in nearby downtowns looking for homeless people and providing them food, warm clothing and other essentials. The items are either donated in kind by other students or are bought through money raised from other students. Hypothetically if a faculty member at LUMS encourages setting up a similar society, how would that contribute to increased expenditure for LUMS ?

  3. Nabeel says:

    Bilal, I think you would be interested in the development economics concept that higher education promotes inequality because rich kids are more likely to finish secondary education and benefit from government subsidies on university tuition.

    I would like to draw attention to IBA’s exemplary policy with regard to the points raised by your post:

    “No applicant who qualifies the admissions test and fulfills other requirements is refused admission because of the inability to afford the costs of the programs at the Institute.” (http://www.iba.edu.pk/aid.asp)

    Basically, money is no reason for anyone to NOT study at IBA. I have seen this myself in my four years there.

    • Bilal Zafar says:

      Thanks Nabeel for you comment.

      I agree that a need-blind admission is an admirable step. But, my contention in this piece is that it is not enough. Our elite universities have to go beyond and play a more pro-active role in bridging the “quality-divide” in the education system.

  4. Aatif says:

    I love these ideas. You accept that these are elite institutions and instead of fighting that, you call upon these institutions to play the role that elites are supposed to play – in lifting up their societies. These are realistic and serious proposals that we would do well to advocate for.

Discuss

  • STEP aspires to be the central place for discussion on improving the state of Science, Technology, and Education in Pakistan. Read More
  • To learn how you can contribute, click here
  • Never miss a new article! Choose your favorite method to stay up to date with STEP
  •